Ron Kind: “I thank my friend from Ohio for yielding me this time. I thought his summary was very accurate on what our amendment…”

“I thank my friend from Ohio for yielding me this time. I thought his summary was very accurate on what our amendment would do. What Mr. Gibbs didn't point out, though, is this would also save $12 billion over 10 years by a more fiscally responsible approach, one that we feel is market-based, and one that we think is economically feasible, one that also maintains an important safety net for farmers if commodity prices do drop. But, listen, the supporters of the Price Loss Coverage program, as currently drafted, will claim the program is necessary to ensure farmers have a safety net for when the market collapses. But, instead, the program in the FARRM Bill before us sets target prices so high that some commodities are guaranteed an 8 percent profit. We don't guarantee any other business in the country that type of a profit margin other than crop insurance companies that are guaranteed a 14 percent profit under this bill. By setting the target prices for programs at this historically high level, it will all but ensure a much higher likelihood of government payouts in the future. In fact, implementation of the Price Loss Coverage program will already require government payouts for the five top commodity crops. Rice alone would pay out $14 per hundred while the current price is at $10.50 today.…”